The Historical Trajectory of Zionism: From Occupation to Domination

: West Asia Expert in Interview with Taghrib News

In an interview with Taghrib News Agency(TNA), he emphasized that Zionism has evolved from territorial occupation to a more expansive policy of regional infiltration and control.

Rouhollahzad categorized Zionism into economic, cultural, religious, and political dimensions, and further divided it into two strategic phases: “occupational Zionism” and “domination-based Zionism.” He explained that the former refers to the movement’s long-standing ambition to occupy the vast territory between the Nile and Euphrates rivers—a vision recently reaffirmed by the Israeli government through published maps, with Prime Minister Netanyahu actively pursuing its realization.

He traced the roots of the occupation strategy back to 1882, with the arrival of Jewish immigrants in Palestine and the establishment of agricultural and industrial settlements. This process accelerated under British mandate and culminated in the founding of Israel on May 25, 1948.

Highlighting the ideological foundation of Zionism, Rouhollahzad noted that the concept of a “Greater Israel” spanning from the Nile to the Euphrates has been central to its strategic doctrine. The 1967 war, he said, was a direct manifestation of this vision, resulting in the occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights, and Sinai Peninsula.

Intifada Halts the “Greater Israel” Agenda

Rouhollahzad emphasized that the Palestinian cause remains a core priority of the Islamic Revolution. He argued that the rise of popular resistance—particularly the first and second Intifadas—forced Zionism to temporarily shelve its expansionist ambitions. “We witnessed a shift in rhetoric from ‘Greater Israel’ to ‘regional convergence’ and ‘peaceful coexistence,’” he said.

During this period, various initiatives emerged, including the “land for peace” proposals, Gaza–Jericho accords, the Arab Peace Initiative, the two-state solution, the “Deal of the Century,” and the Abraham Accords. All these efforts, he explained, were aimed at integrating Israel into the region and ending its isolation. Even the concept of an “Arab NATO” was floated in this context.

From Stalemate to Strategic Domination

According to Rouhollahzad, the failure of Israel’s occupation strategy prompted a shift toward regional integration. Leveraging its economic, military, and political capabilities—and backed by Western powers—Israel revived its ambitions to dominate the Islamic territories between the Nile and Euphrates. He proposed naming this new phase “domination-based Zionism.”

He added that two years after Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, Israel reintroduced the “Greater Israel” plan, believing that the resistance axis had been weakened across its seven fronts and no longer posed an existential threat.

Rouhollahzad argued that Netanyahu views the realization of this plan—especially under current conditions in Gaza—as a path to becoming a powerful and iconic leader. He believes regional governments, under pressure from unfolding events, will be compelled to join and accelerate the Abraham Accords, thereby isolating the resistance and enabling its removal from the regional equation.

A New Path: From Convergence to Expansion

Rouhollahzad described the Abraham Accords as a temporary security buffer for regional governments against the threat of Israeli expansion. He warned that—hypothetically—if resistance forces were eliminated, Israel would waste no time in executing its Nile-to-Euphrates blueprint. In such a scenario, countries like Pakistan, Turkey, and North African states would face direct threats from the regime.

In conclusion, the expert stressed that the survival and strengthening of the resistance axis is essential to safeguarding all nations that fall within the map of “Greater Israel.”